Who is the father? The determination of paternity is a necessary and material step in the establishment of the obligation to support a child. Unlike support and custody, which can change with different circumstances, the issue of paternity is a biological fact and a decision on it is binding on everyone, not just on the child and mother. In family law, the determination of paternity is usually bound up with an application for support. Generally speaking, courts are reluctant to make a finding of non-paternity upon technical grounds, or upon the failure to tender evidence.
A fact situation will illustrate the point. In an application for support, the mother did not appear for a blood test and did not appear in court on her application. The support application was dismissed. Another support application was brought three years later and the alleged father argued that the issue of paternity had been determined in the first application on the basis that the application was dismissed for want of prosecution because of an adverse inference drawn by the court on the failure to appear for a blood test. However, the court held that the second application was not barred because the first application was not heard on its merits. The court noted that it must be careful not to overlook the best interests of the child despite the neglect of the mother in not submitting to a blood test. The only way in which the best interests of the child could properly be determined was for the court to hear evidence on the issue of paternity and then make a determination of the issue.
However, courts may discourage the relitigation of a paternity issue between young unmarried parents. One judge has stated the reason this way: “In many circumstances such as this, when the parties enjoy a relatively pleasant relationship the “possible father” may agree to a paternity finding and later when the relationship has deteriorated or when more personal sexual information is discovered concerning the private matter of sexual intercourse between the mother and other men, i.e., other “possible fathers”, the matter is sought to be placed back before the court. This does not seem to be consistent with the best interest of the child . . .”